Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Macro with the Zuiko 135s?

Subject: Re: [OM] Macro with the Zuiko 135s?
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 21:20:21 -0800
Jim Couch wrote:

The 135, combined with the telescoping auto tube is my favorite setup for flowers and butterflies. The real advantage lies in the working distance you gain over the 80mm. The bokeh is wondeful, I would describe it (hokey as it may sound) as 'smooth and creamy"

I would agree, with some reservations. When I got my 135/4.5 a few months ago, I took a lot of shots in my garden. Where the magnification is fairly high and/or the background is fairly far away, so that it is really out of focus, the bokeh is really luscious <http://www.geocities.com/dreammoose/garden/pages/08-Wet_Iris_Bud.htm>. Where the background is only sorta out of focus, the bokeh is pretty good compared with some other lenses, but can still have some 'busy' quality.

The 135 f/2.8 actually works fairly well for macro stuff as well.

You really need to define your terms when using regular lenses for macro. "MTF curves and test charts aside", true macro lenses are corrected for flat field and especially to maintain it at close distances. General purpose lenses generally have more field curvature and it may get worse at close distances. For pictures of 3-D objects, regular lenses can give quite nice results. They could even do a better job than a true macro lens on an object with a shape that happens to match the field curvature. Use them to take a picture of a flat object like a painting and you will almost certainly be disappointed.

Bokeh is not as good, and you will need more than 25mm worth of tube in most cases.. It does work well with the telescoping tube.

Unlike the 135/4.5, it will not focus anywhere close to infinity when on the auto tube.

Fast Primes wrote:

I know the Zuiko 135F4.5 macro is optimized for a 1:5 ratio and will of course, be better corrected than a 135F2.8 or 135F3.5 Zuiko on MTF curves and test charts. But what about such things as flowers and butterflies? How about such qualities as "bokeh"? How does a 135F2.8 with a 25mm extension tube or high quality 55mm close-up lens fare against the 135F4.5 macro itself?


Moose



< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz